Schindler Backer’s Agitprop

The trailer for 2016: Obama’s America, a new political documentary out this summer starring the conservative pundit Dinesh D’Souza and based on his controversial 2010 book, The Roots of Obama’s Rage, has all the hallmarks of current right-wing agitprop. There are shadowy images of the president and his ubiquitous “Hope” posters set against snapshots of impoverished African cities and rioting mobs, snippets of Obama’s triumphant 2008 victory speech in Chicago’s Grant Park, and lingering panoramas of the dawn-lit Capitol and Lincoln Memorial. It also carries a credit line most partisan filmmakers could only dream of: “From Gerald R. Molen, producer of Academy Award-winning best picture Schindler’s List.”

It’s a connection that lends the movie instant credibility—and the filmmakers aren’t shying away from emphasizing the connection. D’Souza drew cheers and whistles when he mentioned the Schindler link in a speech at last winter’s Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington. Attendees at the annual convention of the Faith and Freedom Coalition, a conservative group founded by former Christian Coalition head Ralph Reed, added their applause after a trailer screening. The conservative news site Breitbart.com ran a post hyping the film as Molen’s political retort to his Schindler co-producer: director Steven Spielberg, a major Democratic donor.

Molen, who spent decades supervising productions not just for Spielberg but for other prominent Democratic donors like Robert Redford and Sydney Pollack, makes a peculiar ideologue. Though he’s always been a Republican—he was particularly enthusiastic about Ronald Reagan in 1980 after Jimmy Carter’s handling of the Iranian hostage crisis—“I wasn’t really involved in politics,” he told me in a telephone interview from his home in Bigfork, Mt. His last big project was Minority Report, with Spielberg and Tom Cruise, in 2002; he’s never been involved in an explicitly partisan film before. “I have no design on making political movies,” Molen told me. “It’s not what I’m about.” But, he went on, “I’m working on this because it’s a story I think needs to be told.”

Yet in joining forces with D’Souza, Molen has attached himself to a lightning rod. Born in India, D’Souza has made a career of being super-patriotic about his adopted country, and of late he has shifted his entire focus to questioning the president’s patriotism.

The Roots of Obama’s Rage is a Talmudic parsing of Obama’s Dreams From My Father, and it is premised on the idea that Obama’s entire worldview was shaped by the anticolonial sentiments of his Kenyan father, whom the president met just once after his parents split. D’Souza claims he’s qualified to make the determination because of his own childhood experience in postcolonial India, and the subtext is that Obama’s Americanness is somehow suspect or deficient. It’s an argument that puts D’Souza a half-step away from birtherism, a far-right trope that the conservative columnist George Will has exhorted his party to reject.

But Molen said D’Souza had illuminated exactly what he finds so troubling about Obama’s vision for America. “Dinesh says, ‘I’m a Third World guy who’s embraced America and he’s an American guy who’s embraced the Third World,’ ” Molen told me. “Each saw the country in a different way, and one’s an American and one wasn’t, but Dinesh is a true American.” He said he particularly wanted undecided swing voters to see the movie. “For me, it’s more for the individual who is riding the fence and doesn’t really understand,” Molen said. “It doesn’t take a mental giant to see the course this country is on is a disaster.”

***

Molen moved from Montana to Los Angeles as a child after his parents lost their farm in the wake of World War II. His father opened a café across the street from the Republic Pictures lot. “They were from old-school America, and they had this drive,” Molen said. After graduating from high school, Molen joined the Marines, and when he got out he went to work at Republic as a truck driver. In 1959, he went to Universal Pictures, where he eventually became the head of transportation before striking out on his own. His credits include Tootsie, The Postman Always Rings Twice, Ordinary People, and The Color Purple—his first film for Spielberg, and the film he says changed his life. In 1990, after working on Batteries Not Included; Bright Lights, Big City; and Rain Man, Molen became head of production for Spielberg’s company, Amblin Entertainment, where he produced Hook, the Jurassic Park films, and Twister.

Schindler’s List came up in early 1992, amid preparations for Jurassic Park. “Steven turned to me and said, ‘I’d like to do Schindler’s List,’ so I said, ‘OK, let me think about how to do this,’ ” Molen told me. He brought on Branko Lustig, a Croatian survivor of Auschwitz and Bergen-Belsen who had worked as a location manager in Europe for Fiddler on the Roof and a production supervisor for Sophie’s Choice, to serve as a third producer. Molen regularly describes the experience as the most profound of his life. “Some of my Jewish friends would say it was bashert,” said Molen, who is Mormon. “The impact it had was phenomenal.”

The movie opened the floodgates of memory for many survivors, and Molen played a key role in setting up the Shoah Foundation, which sent videographers to record interviews with almost 52,000 Holocaust survivors. Molen conducted the 50,000th interview himself, with his Schindler co-producer Lustig, in 1999, and still chokes up talking about it. “Jerry had a deep emotional connection to it,” said James Moll, one of the founding executive directors of the Shoah Foundation. “He was not just a numbers and logistics guy by any means—he definitely has a strong connection with the Holocaust survivors and keeping the memory of the Holocaust alive.”

Moll, like others Molen worked with, said he could not recall ever discussing politics together, though he knew Molen was conservative. “I always say I wish there were more people like him,” said Moll, who produced films for the Democratic National Convention in 2004 and 2008. “He’s a man who could give Republicans a good name.”

“I never hid my feelings, but there was never any reason to,” Molen told me. “When you’re working on a film, the goal is always the next day, and as a production manager that was my focus.” But one of his favorite stories about being on the Schindler’s List set is about a man who approached the crew one night at their hotel. “He said, ‘I survived the Warsaw ghetto, and let me tell you, never give up your guns,’ ” Molen told me. “So, that was a great lesson for me, because we had so much going on in this country then about the Second Amendment.” Yet he added that he’d been happy to meet Hillary Clinton, who was then first lady, and Al Gore, then vice-president, when they visited Spielberg. “Steven was a Democrat since I can remember,” Molen said. “It never made me think any less of him.” (Representatives for Spielberg did not respond to requests for comment from Tablet.)

But the era in which politics could be politely discussed in Hollywood has passed, according to Molen. “When we were doing Tootsie in New York I remember sitting around a poker table on a Saturday night talking about the political issues of the day,” Molen said. “We could have our disagreements but we talked and went out to dinner as friends. It’s too hard now.”

With Obama’s America, Molen is marching directly into the breach. The film, whose $3 million budget was partly funded by TD Ameritrade founder Joe Ricketts, purports to introduce viewers to the “real” Barack Obama, an effort D’Souza described to the CPAC audience as “a journey into the heart of Obama.” It’s already been sufficiently controversial to get Molen disinvited from a speaking engagement at a Montana high school.

Molen’s former colleagues say that he has every right to invoke his Schindler credentials, even though some find the project politically objectionable. “It’s legitimate for him to use it, since he is the producer of Jurassic Park and Schindler’s List,” said June Beallor, a founding director of the Shoah Foundation, who oversaw the film unit for the 2004 Democratic National Convention and produced films for the 2008 convention. “It’s a shame that these are his beliefs, but it’s his right.”

Molen said he had read D’Souza’s book before he was approached about turning it into a film. “I’m in my short years,” said Molen, who is 77. “My feeling is right now we do not have a strong protector of Israel, someone who is watching out for Israel and some of the finer things about America.” D’Souza called him on the recommendation of mutual friends, Molen said. (D’Souza was traveling and was not available for an interview.) “I said, I’m in,” Molen said. “All of us love to get lost in a great book but there’s something about the visual message, visual storytelling.” Molen said it was a lesson he learned from Schindler’s List. “When the book came out, a lot of people pooh-poohed it,” Molen said. “But when it came out on film, people raved.”

***

Like this article? Sign up for our Daily Digest to get Tablet Magazine’s new content in your inbox each morning.

Allison Hoffman is a senior editor at Tablet Magazine. Her Twitter feed is @allisont_dc.

WAIT, WHY DO I HAVE TO PAY TO COMMENT?
Tablet is committed to bringing you the best, smartest, most enlightening and entertaining reporting and writing on Jewish life, all free of charge. We take pride in our community of readers, and are thrilled that you choose to engage with us in a way that is both thoughtful and thought-provoking. But the Internet, for all of its wonders, poses challenges to civilized and constructive discussion, allowing vocal—and, often, anonymous—minorities to drag it down with invective (and worse). Starting today, then, we are asking people who'd like to post comments on the site to pay a nominal fee—less a paywall than a gesture of your own commitment to the cause of great conversation. All proceeds go to helping us bring you the ambitious journalism that brought you here in the first place.

I NEED TO BE HEARD! BUT I DONT WANT TO PAY.
Readers can still interact with us free of charge via Facebook, Twitter, and our other social media channels, or write to us at letters@tabletmag.com. Each week, we’ll select the best letters and publish them in a new letters to the editor feature on the Scroll.

We hope this new largely symbolic measure will help us create a more pleasant and cultivated environment for all of our readers, and, as always, we thank you deeply for your support.

I wish that people from each political party would stop idolizing their respective elected officials, declaring that they can do no wrong, and brushing off any and all criticisms. Obama is not faultless, and neither are his policies. (The same applies for the Republicans.) He may very well be influenced by his father’s thinking. It certainly was a surprise for this expat that he bowed to foreign officials. That was a very inexperienced and counterproductive thing to do, as it gave the appearance of weakness. Not good.

It is very disappointing to see this film characterized as “agitprop,” when the mainstream media in the U.S. have all signed on to the Obama re-election campaign. I can hardly read the NYTimes, it is so biased and its reports distored. Not to mention the left wing messages of vast numbers of Hollywood films.
Let’s face it: the U.S. has suffered great decline, and is in a disastrous situation. Much of this was obama’s plan, and the rest his inexperience and incompetence.
So pointing out Obama’s agenda and weaknesses is “agitprop”? Sorry, TABLET, your bias is showing.

Obama is a disaster for America, Israel and the free world. This is not an issue of GOP vs Dem’s, this is an issue of survival. He is not a friend to the Jewish people, or democracy as a republic. It has nothing to do with race, I think he is just a poor choice to lead this country to safe borders and a good economy

Just a bit more on NYTime’s agitprop:
Clifford D. May
5th July 2012 – Scripps Howard News Service
‘The New York Times’ editorial writers — who reflect the opinions of the newspaper’s publisher and principal owner, Arthur Ochs Sulzberger Jr., who hires and fires them — have their knickers in a knot over Sheldon Adelson. What has the Las Vegas hotel-and-casino tycoon done? The Times asserts that he is spending his money “to advance his personal, ideological and financial agenda, which is wildly at odds with the nation’s needs.”Readers of the Times are expected to take it on faith that Mr. Sulzberger, who came by his status through inheritance, accurately perceives the nation’s needs, and that Mr. Adelson, who over the course of his 77 years rose from dire poverty to fabulous wealth by building businesses, has not a clue.Full disclosure No. 1: I spent some of the best years of my life working for the Times, as a reporter, foreign correspondent, and editor. Then, as now, some of the world’s finest journalists were employed by the Grey Lady. One thing they have had in common: They do not draw conclusions and level charges except on the basis of solid evidence. By contrast, the Times’ editorial writers no longer burden themselves with serious argumentation. They assert, they preach, they allege. I have heard Times reporters grumble about this — though not on the record.Full disclosure No. 2: I know Mr. Adelson and, on occasion, he’s donated funds to the non-partisan, non-profit organization I head to support work on national-security issues he views as critically important. But not for that reason do I defend his constitutional right to spend as much of his money as he likes to persuade his fellow Americans that his agenda is preferable to that favored by the Times. I would just as vehemently defend the free-speech rights of George Soros, another multibillionaire who spends lavishly to promote his agenda — an agenda with which the Times largely agrees and I do not. The Times has never criticized Mr. Soros as they have Mr. Adelson. In other words: I am championing a principle without exception; the Times — not so much.The Times promotes its policy preferences — again, we’re really talking about Mr. Sulzberger’s policy preferences — every day, using ink it buys by the barrel. The Times sees that as part of its mission, correctly. But private citizens are entitled to the same free-speech rights as the media — unless, of course, one embraces as a serious principle what I’ve always assumed the great journalist A. J. Liebling intended as a quip: “Freedom of the press is guaranteed only to those who own one.” It should not go unobserved that the Times rarely allows opposing views to be aired on its op-ed pages.Much of the money that Mr. Adelson, Mr. Soros, and others give to political candidates is spent on communications — ads in newspapers (including the Times) and on television and radio. The ads run by the politicians Mr. Adelson is likely to support often rebut the opinions articulated by the Times and other mainstream media, as well as the “public media,” which are subsidized with taxpayer dollars.Mr. Adelson recently spent more than $20 million to support the presidential candidacy of Newt Gingrich. The Times calls that an attempt to “buy influence” but, more objectively, it was an attempt to persuade voters and, in my view, a net contribution to the national policy debate. Now Mr. Adelson is supporting Mitt Romney. That support, the Times fears, could help push the Republican candidate “over the top in a close race like this year’s.” The Times sees that as unfair. What the Times views as fairer: The Times supporting President Obama and pushing him over the top in a close race like this year’s.The Times mentions only one substantive issue motivating Mr. Adelson: He is writing “huge checks” because, the Times alleges, of his “disgust for a two-state solution to the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, supported by President Obama and most Israelis.” What is the basis for the Times’ use of a loaded word such as “disgust”? Readers are not told. The Times adds only that Mr. Adelson “considers a Palestinian state a stepping stone for the destruction of Israel and the Jewish people.”Why in the world might Mr. Adelson think that? Well, there is the fact that Hamas, which rules Gaza, has repeatedly proclaimed that there can be “no solution” to the Palestinian–Israeli conflict “except through jihad,” a religious war through which “Islam will obliterate [Israel] just as it obliterated others before it.”There is the fact that Mahmoud Abbas, leader of the Palestinian Authority and Fatah, has banned “all informal meetings between Israelis and Palestinians” because such dialogue promotes “the culture of peace” and is designed to “normalize” relations between Israelis and Palestinians. There is the fact that Palestinian Authority official Adli Sadeq has written in the official PA daily, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, that Israelis “fool themselves, assuming that Fatah accepts them and recognizes the right of their state to exist, and that it is Hamas alone that loathes them and does not recognize the right of this state to exist. They ignore the fact that this state, based on a fabricated [Zionist] enterprise, never had any shred of a right to exist.”If Times editorial writers have contradictory evidence, reasons to believe that Hamas and Fatah do not see a Palestinian state as “a stepping stone for the destruction of Israel and the Jewish people,” it would be useful for them to present it.The Times goes on to charge that Mr. Adelson’s “overriding interest is his own wallet. He rails against the president’s ‘socialist-style economy’ and redistribution of wealth, but what he really fears is Mr. Obama’s proposal to raise taxes on companies like his that make a huge amount of money overseas.” Think about this for a minute: A man well into his eighth decade worth billions of dollars “fears” a tax increase?The Times neglects to inform readers that Mr. Adelson does not give away money only to participate in political debates. He also has donated huge amounts for medical research, education, and other philanthropic pursuits. If his “overriding interest” were his wallet, would he do that?The Times concludes by lamenting that we live in a time when “there are no legal or moral limits” preventing Mr. Adelson from helping “to elect Republicans who promise to keep his billions intact.” Under the moral and legal regime the Times would prefer, newspaper owners, “progressive” politicians, and government bureaucrats would decide how to spend Mr. Adelson’s money — and he would shut the hell up. I leave it for you to ponder whether that agenda would be in line with “the nation’s needs.”’— Clifford D. May is president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a policy institute focusing on terrorism and Islamism.

Clearly, Obama has been a disaster for this country and for Israel. It is not suprising that Mr. Molen is making an anti Obama film. What is suprising is these Jewish liberals, who have seen all the harm Obama has done to the US and Israel, who still support him. Are they that foolish or are they too stubborn to admit they made a mistake?

Once you understand that many Jews in this country are members of the New Class (academia, media, government bureaucrats, lawyers, “helping” professions,…), and vote as members of same for policies that benefit them in the SHORT term (in practice, this means: expanding statism), much becomes clear. (Needless to say, this behavior is NOT specifically Jewish, just affects them disproportionately because of their representation in NC professions.)

Can the NC all be so stupid as not to see that the current trajectory of spending the country into bankruptcy to finance the expansion and increased clout of the NC (and to subsidize its client populations/electoral cannon fodder) is unsustainable? (“That which cannot go on, won’t” as Jewish economist Herbert Stein memorably used to say.) Many surely lack the long-term vision to see that fixing the system is in their LONG-term benefit (even if it means sacrificing some in the short term), but others may realize that the system will blow up soon anyhow and milk the system while they can. (This behavior in “pre-catastrophic” situations is a well-known concept in game theory.)

Actually he undermined negotiations by demanding Israel stop building in Jerusalem, even though the PA never made that demand (though they were forced to by Obama’s demand.) He also outlined future borders which he should have known Israel wouldn’t agree to but which became a Palestinian demand. Not suprising for a man who went to an anti-Semitic church for twenty years.

Obama has talked about future borders based on the ’67 Green Line PLUS LAND SWAPS!
It is this last point that the Right chooses to ignore.
Or does the Right think that Israel is entitled to the entire West Bank?

I don’t think the 1948 cease fire lines (even Obama was careful not to refer to them as borders) are any more legitimate than the 1967 cease fire lines. How the Judea and Samaria are to be allocated between Jews and arabs is subject to negotiation. To rely on cease fire lines, violated by the arabs, that haven’t existed for 45 years is not the answer.

So you don’t think the ceasefire lines are legitimate? Well then that leaves everything up for grabs until a final peace treaty is negotiated, doesn’t it? And thus, the people with the most power can do most of the grabbing, can’t they? But I digress. Your initial point was that Obama “outlined future borders,” and I answered (for the reason above) that this is just not true. So let’s leave it at that.

Ceasefire lines are legitimate until violated which the 1948 lines were. But what I said was that the 1948 lines were no more legitimate than the 1967 lines except that the 1948 were with Jordan which has since relinquished all claims to Judea and Samaria. You are absolutely correct that the people with the most power can do the most grabbing. Therefore it would make sense for the people with least power to make peace as quickly as possible.

I’m saying, pending a final settlement, there is no Palestinian land and Jews have a right to settle in Judea and Samaria. Look at a map produced in an arab country, you will not see Israel delineated within the 1948 cease fire lines. They show the former Britsh Palestine mandate as a single unit. They consider the whole are as occupied.

Funny how none of you right wing lunitics remember George W. Holding hands with the Saudi prince. And lets remember his phoney Iraq war (any of your kids among the 5,000 dead? By the way, all of you conservitives his phony war and his tax cut to his friends were u paid for and turned a surplus into a deficit. He paid no attention to the peace process and left it to die of neglect. And by his phoney war he strenghtened Iran by destroying Iraq and making it more dangerous for Israel. Oh and by the way, Bishop Mitts church is busy baptizing dead Jews. Now that would make a great movie. I admit Obama is not perfect, but allof you hatera hate one thing in common about him-that is the color of his skin.

For Sharon Resnick:
Where were you, Einstein when the lights went out? Standing in the dark
as usual. That’s what I hate about civilians that have never gained
experience in our military or in Federal employment, but are quick to mouth
words of non-wisdom, just to hear themselves talk. By the way, what is your
level of education? What have you ever accomplished with your life? That’s
what I thought. Your hero, the Moron that currently resides in the White
House, will not receive a second term. He has been given the opportunity
to lead but he has reneged on this responsibility and catered to his
brethren in the Middle East, for after all, this Moron is a closet Muslim and
in addition, he is a Communist, a Marxist, a Criminal, a Socialist, and
an Arnarchist, if you follow. He is in cahoots with George Soros, the
traitorous Hungarian/American citizen with both plotting the demise of the
U.S. economy and capitalism as we know it. Do the research on THE NEW
WORLD ORDER, THE SHADOW GOVERNMENT, and THE COMMITTEE OF
300, and then talk to me.

“Funny how none of you right wing lunitics remember George W. Holding hands with the Saudi prince.”
Actually, many of us attacked Bush far earlier. I guess you’ve never dealt with the non-beltway right.
” And lets remember his phoney Iraq war (any of your kids among the 5,000 dead?” A relatively small number of Americans who served in Iraq died. None of my friends who served were killed, but one lost an arm and suffered some rather nasty injuries in an IED explosion.
“By the way, all of you conservitives his phony war and his tax cut to
his friends were u paid for and turned a surplus into a deficit”
Actually, the failure to reign in spending did that. Bipartisan lunacy.
” He paid no attention to the peace process and left it to die of neglect.”
What peace? Arafat killed it when he responded to Barak’s offer by starting an intefada in 2000.

” And by his phoney war he strenghtened Iran by destroying Iraq and making it more dangerous for Israel”
The Iraq of 2003 was no impediment to Iran. Try again.

Brynababy and Sharon Resnick, I am with you. Our president is not perfect but the right wing lunatic fringe gave us nothing but a devastated economy, a stronger bolder Iran and a USA that came that much closer to being a bananna republic with laws that support the 1% while the bottom 99% were left to suffer. “Convert-our-dead-Jews Mit,” should not earn anyone’s vote until he repatriots his money. For now he is an economic citizen of the Cayman Island. For anyone to think that a man running as a candidate for the top office in these United States to engage in tax evasion by placing his money in a foregin country is proof of their lunacy. President Obama is a correction to the Republican mess. If any one should ask we can answer, President Obama has been good for Jews and the rest of the world.

The trailer borders on racism. All images connected to the President are dark, dirty, smokey and filled with fiery violence. When “America” as it should be is referenced, there are only white people, Boy Scouts, and the American flag. Luckily so far, despite millions being spent by Republicans (I thought they were supposed to be frugal) Obama leads Romney in places like Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Most people know a pack of lies when they see them.

The charge of racism is the last resort of those Jews who simply have no defense for their views. They call anyone who finds Obama a disturbing president and human being—racist!

Nothing new, is it? When their grandparents were defending Stalin and Mao, if any of us dared challenge that equally moronic orthodoxy, we were called—fascist!

Nothing has changed. The Jewish liberal, progressive Left is what it has always been: a know-nothing feel-good, morally arrogant bunch. Well, here’s the fact: we Jews have been hounded out of every nation that sheltered us throughout history. If our community here continues on the way it is, acting in opposition to the way 70% of Americans think and feel, the welcome mat for Jews will be withdrawn.

Barack Obama is a disgraceful president and a disgraceful human being. He is not even at the level of Jimmy Carter who for all his faults was and remains a patriotic American ex-president. Our principal worry re: Obama should be what he is likely to do after he leaves the White House. Will he betray America’s secrets to our enemies in the “Third World?” Will he pursue his “class and race baiting” activities? Will he seek to undermine this country’s prosperity and dominance in world affairs? I think those are real concerns. Am I, is Dinesh D’Souza—a racist, for holding such views? Is that the best the Jewish Left can do?

My grandfather came here from eastern Europe during WWI. He died a loyal, passionate American, disgusted by the Jewish Left. We spoke Yiddish in our house, and “ate kosher.” We did not drink Kool-Aid. And BTW, we still “eat kosher.” It reminds me who I am, what I come from, what is important in life. Freedom, individual honor and responsibility, educating one’s children, working hard, serving one’s country, respecting its institutions and history. Whereas, the Jewish Left is devoted to dishonoring this nation and demolishing its institutions, disrespecting its history. Of course, that is why they like Barack Obama, who shares their dislike of the nation he was elected to lead.

Tablet and Hoffman should be ashamed. Why not decry the censorship of Molen’s High School speech solely because he was a Pro-American conservative and his intended speech’s content didn’t fit the Liberal Agenda of the high school’s administration? Every sentence in Hoffman’s piece exposes her own liberal in-the-tank-for-Obama biases and positions. You make the reader sympathize with Molen, so thank you Ms. Hoffman. We are indebted to you for performing a useful service here.

As usual, brilliantly written by Alison Hoffman, and a good deconstruction of crackpot ideas based solely on racism, pure and simple. It’s a fantasy that swing voters will see this film, as as D’Souza’s ridiculous claims that Obama thinks in 3rd World Terms. He’s no Chavez, far from it. He’s a classic American success story. The history of the LDS church and racism is long and stark, and only being revised lately.

For Vidal Demonti:
Before you cast your precious vote, first perform a bit of research and learn
that this Moron feels comfortable associating with Communists, Marxists,
Anarchists, Socialists and Criminals. Become aware of George Soros, the
traitorous Hungarian/American citizen whose sole purpose in life along with his
boyfriend, the Moron whom resides in the White House, but not for long, is to
destroy the United States’ economy and capitalism as we know it. In addition,
Soros, the leader of the pack and “THE NEW WORLD ORDER,” maintains to
eventually hire a non-elected world-president to cater to Soros and the
rest of the billionaire elites. They are deathly concerned that they will
eventually lose what they have due to the unrest on the planet, currently,
and I agree with their issue, but they are manipulating the world to
represent a Socialist/Communist regime, world-wide, an issue that the
rest of the world will never accept, therefore, there will be a clash between
the world’s titans of industry, eventually: the Middle East against the West!!!

Meh. Molen’s a repub, a member of a party that shames the country with their 18th century thinking. Unless Molen has the gift of reading Obama’s mind, his book will be the same as previous books written about Obama, full of garbage.

You expect me to vote for Romney whose cult is as so called church went to Jewish gravesites in the NY area and taking names baptised the dead Jews as Mormon. Don’t insult me and my relatives who have not a single converted descendent. Romney is too smarmy to be president.

It it can be marketed, it can be sold so I laud anyone who can give someone like Dinesh D’Souza his retirement money for his use! America is truly a great nation.
I beileve the stuff is madeup but it is nice fiction that can be absorbed just as I liked the recent movie, Abraham Lincoln, Vampire Killer, a farfetched illusory tale appearing to be factual for those ignorant of historical intent and content.
Since when is Israel a state of USA? If Israel is independent then it can and will do what it needs to do, as a sovereign state defending itself against foreign enemies instead of asking or begging for US help to sanction initiatives on its behalf!

The only ones who’d consider this ‘Agitprop’ would be the Far Left and of course – the media. D’Souza: ‘I’m a Third World guy who’s embraced America and he’s (Obama) an American guy who’s embraced the Third World.’ I share D’Souza’s patriotic love for America, having been raised in a Socialistic society throughout my childhood-20’s. With Obama at the helm of the Free World, I fear we are heading towards a ‘Revolutionary’ fight similar to that to our forefathers of this nation. We must continue to fight for our basic freedoms that are under constant ridicule from the left & media. No – Vote – Obama!

Name (required)Email (required, will not be published)Website (optional)

Message

2000

Your comment may be no longer than 2,000 characters, approximately 400 words. HTML tags are not permitted, nor are more than two URLs per comment. We reserve the right to delete inappropriate comments.